Over the last two weeks while the country mourned the terror of recent events, the Congressional legislative agenda, including the farm bill re-authorization, was placed on hold. It now appears things will begin moving very quickly. Reports are now flying around Washington that the House version of the farm bill (H.R. 2646) will likely move for a floor vote next Wednesday, Oct. 3. 

This proposal by the Texas leadership in the House (Stenholm-Combest) is opposed by virtually all farm groups and has been likened to a "Texas Tornado" because it "moves too fast and causes too much damage, does not address the trends of concentration and vertical integration, and weakens important conservation provisions. Two weeks ago, members of the National Campaign for Sustainable Agriculture, the National Family Farm Coalition and the National Farmers Union had a press conference in Washington DC expressing solidarity against the bill which continues large subsidies and fuels overproduction. Bill Christison of NFFC said, "If you find yourself in a hole, the first thing to do is stop digging."  Learn more about the House farm bill.

Last week, the Department of Agriculture released "Taking Stock for the New Century," a long-awaited 120-page statement of principles on farm policy and the next farm bill (available at www.usda.gov). The report notes a marked change of direction for the Bush Administration farm policy, including a recognition that the current system of farm payments directs disproportionate assistance to a few large farms, and a call for expanded conservation programs. Several conservation groups, including Defenders of Wildlife, have praised the conservation and small farm focus of the report while keeping an eye on the rumor that the Administration is using farm policy as a chit to broker the passage of "Fast Track" trade authority. Surprisingly, the situation signals sizable cracks in longstanding control of farm policy by giant commodities concerns. According to the Environment and Energy Daily, a lobbyist for the Farm Bureau, for instance, expressed" concern the that USDA is getting more involved in the social  interests of farmers rather than crop production. 'We would disagree with that kind of philosophy,' she said."

For more information on the Farm Bureau's promotion of corporate agribusiness at the expense of the family farmer, please visit: http://www.familyfarmer.org/sections/meet.html

3. SENATE DEMOCRATS RELEASE FARM BILL PRINCIPLES

Responding to the release of the USDA Farm Bill principles, the Senate Democratic Policy Committee released their own set of Farm Bill Principles last week. Citing the failure of Freedom to Farm and the need for a series of ad hoc farm disaster bills, the Senate Democrats proclaimed that "it is not enough to simply reauthorize or make small modifications to the current Farm Bill."

The central features of their proposal for a new farm bill include: 1) Counter-cyclical income safety net; 2) Stronger conservation provisions; 3) Fair and competitive international and domestic markets; and 4) Rural community economic revitalization. Other issues of importance include food safety, local value adding enterprises, credit access, research, hunger prevention and humanitarian food assistance.

The DPC's statement of principles is available at: http://democrats.senate.gov/~dpc/pubs/SEQ-264.html

4. BT CORN: BACK IN THE NEWS

Last year news rocked the consumer world when environmentalists released evidence that a bio-engineered product (BT-Corn) not approved for human consumption was being sold in taco shells. Immediately a whirlwind of complaints went out and several large food retailers like Taco Bell stopped buying the product. Now, according to the Center for Food Safety (CFS), the manufacturer of "BT-Corn", Aventis, and the federal government may have known about this situation nine months before the news broke. According to federal documents Aventis knew from a survey that farmers were not able to keep Bt-corn separate from non bio-engineered corn. Speaking under anonymity in the New York Times (September 4) a company official for Aventis said simply, "We were not pleased with how we responded." Learn more about this issue. 

If you would like to subscribe or unsubscribe to this list, visit our
Rural Updates Subscriber Center